Of course there’s a Plan B – it’s Curzon Street in Eastside

Jul 25 2008 Agenda

Lord Snape, a former MP for West Bromwich East and chairman of Travel West Midlands, says the region needs to be more ambitious when considering its future with regard to rail travel.

---------------------

Oh dear. Just when the supporters of the ludicrous ‘Gateway’ scheme to tart up New Street Station thought it was safe to rattle the begging bowl round developers for the outstanding £250 million, along comes the House of Commons Transport Select Committee with a set of buffers and red light which ought to derail the whole thing.

Not only did MPs describe the proposals as ‘cosmetic’, they demanded alternatives to New Street be considered. In questioning the issue of whether New Street is ever going to be able to accommodate the number of trains likely to be using the station in two or three decades, they do the city and the national rail network a service, and deserve better than the predictable, semi-hysterical and incoherent response of the scheme’s supporters.

For council deputy leader Paul Tilsley to insist ‘Gateway’ ‘is exactly the right solution’ indicates his knowledge of current railway operating practices is minimal, whilst Network Rail PR man Dominic Pendry’s risible view the company is ‘looking at doing our own report into what the network might need in, say, 30 or 40 years’ time’ and ‘it’s far too early to suggest there’s a need for a second station or hub in Birmingham’ is just laughable.

As Tuesday’s Post editorial so accurately put it ‘the notorious bottleneck where scores of trains queue to enter New Street each day will continue until additional platforms or track are provided or more likely, a new larger station is provided at Eastside.’ Only last Friday I understand Chris Rowley, Network Rail’s area general manager, West Midlands, told the West Midlands Business Council passenger numbers ‘were growing faster in our region than anywhere else in the country.’ He went on to say, I am told, when Network Rail published their Route Utilisation Study they included three forecasts for passenger growth: low, medium and high.

Yet the actual number of passengers now is exceeding their highest forecasts. Doesn’t inspire much confidence in their future forecasts does it? He went on to say the London Midland train company (which runs the Region’s local and semi-fast services) is expecting to carry as many passengers by the end of this year as it forecast for 2011-12 in its franchise bid a year ago.

As those of us who regularly sit in stationary trains waiting for a path into New Street know only too well, the capacity crunch isn’t coming – it’s already with us.

Virgin Trains expect their Pendolino trains to be full by 2011. As regulars know, some already are! The company hopes to extend them from nine to 11 coaches. Now the Government has come up with a scheme to procure additional coaches, but it is unlikely they will be in service by 2011. If they’re not we’re going to suffer even greater overcrowding.

From December there will be three Pendolino trains an hour to and from London daily. Originally there were to be four, one via Nuneaton instead of the usual Coventry, a route which will be at capacity from December. The fourth train was dropped because of insufficient platform capacity at New Street.

Incidentally whilst re-signalling the Coventry area this year those geniuses at Network Rail took out the passing loop (which allowed a faster train to overtake a slower one) at Tile Hill. So far from seeking to quadruple the line (which the LMS first proposed and acquired the adjacent land to do in the 1930s) Network Rail has reduced capacity. Still, according to Mr Pendry we’ve nothing to worry about for 30 or 40 years. One wonders if we do really share the same planet. Network Rail also claim under ‘Gateway’ they plan to extend New Street’s platforms. The obvious questions are, which ones, and how? Capacity at New Street is limited by tunnels at either end. These prevent more lines being built and would also prevent most platforms being lengthened.

The platforms are divided into the East end ‘A’ and West end ‘B’ with signals halfway down separating the sections. New Street is operated for signalling purposes as two stations back to back. When longer trains like Pendolinos are in they require both A and B ends, reducing capacity.

The same problem will arise with services operated by London Midland when they receive their new ‘Desiro’ electric trains. They plan to operate these in eight-coach formations to cater for the passenger growth referred to in Mr Rowley’s speech.

The platforms at Berkswell and Tile Hill will be extended this year to cater for them. Their length will therefore mean they too will occupy A and B ends of the same platform at New Street, further reducing capacity. Yet City planners and ‘Gateway’ supporters argue New Street can cope with more passengers because trains can be lengthened. Councillor Tilsley claims the Transport Committee’s conclusions are ‘out of date.’

When city planner calculations were made they were based on the three-car sets like those used on the Cross-City line in a six-car formation. It’s those calculations which are ‘out of date’ for the reasons outlined above. ‘Gateway’ just won’t work.

There are two other factors which should be considered before ‘Gateway’ goes ahead. Does anyone with an iota of railway operating experience believe the extensive, albeit cosmetic, work necessary to ‘tart up’ the passenger accommodation can be carried out without further massive interruption of train services in and out of the station? The answer to that has got to be no.

Have passengers not suffered enough because of West Coast modernisation in recent years? No gain without pain we’ll be told and everything will be complete by 2013. This is just in time to start the re-signalling scheme (estimated completion 2015) which is guaranteed to further dislocate services.

Re-signalling must be done to replace the 1960’s system in place and planned to accommodate 600 trains a day, although from December it will actually be responsible for over 1500.

Councillor Tilsley claims there is no Plan B. But there always was an alternative. Build a bigger and better station at East Side around Curzon Street. Such a station would provide huge advantages. Up to 17 platforms. No disruption to existing services. Integrated with Moor Street giving Chiltern Line connections and trains to Hereford, Stourbridge and Worcester.

Such a vision could also provide accommodation for high-speed trains. The city council told a recent Railway Forum conference a new high speed line (HS 2) would bring ‘enormous economic and regeneration benefits to Birmingham and the West Midlands’.

Steven Hughes the city’s chief executive said: “HS2 is definitely in the city’s long term plans. It will have a transformational impact on Birmingham and the region.”

Alas he didn’t say where such a futuristic project would actually arrive because it certainly won’t be high speed into New Street.

It may not be too late to keep the Grand Central plan alive. It would need the Government to step in and protect the site for future railway development. That would need the region’s opinion formers to let regional minister Liam Byrne and Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly know we will not be satisfied with a property-driven mish-mash of flats, shops, offices and, let’s not forget, a Vertical Theme Park

Surely this City and Region can do better than that.